The trick is not to look at which patents have been _granted_, but to look at which patents have been _granted and held up in court_. It's not hard to persuade a non-technical judge that such-and-such is a very clever non-obvious invention. It's much harder to persuade someone else's lawyers who have a reason to want to overturn it.brian.shapiro said:I find I disagree though, if you don't have the resources to put things into practice you shouldn't be excluded from having a patent. Most software patents should be thrown out because they don't have any real ingenuity to them, or are too vague.Ray7 said:*snip*